Gollum

I'd go back and pay another $500 for the trans.... Otherwise looks like a killer deal. I'd have said buy it.

I think this idea is up there with the idea of chopping a S30. Can it be done? Sure. But at what time and expense. Odds are most people will end up not having the time and energy to "do it right" and end up with a half-ass job that not only looks bad, but functions severely worse than stock. This IS hybridZ, so I'm not saying don't do it. I'm saying have a realistic plan and mindset about it. Someone can't make a "drop in" flush fit window that truly works. As mentioned, you need to completely redesign the seal and thus interior side as well. This will never be an over the counter job to do right, and the camaro on that site doesn't show me otherwise, and honestly doesn't look that exciting to me.

Thank you for the clarification, for some reason I'd never seen the distinction laid out but now that you mention it that makes total sense.

Roger, do you have definite chamber volume data I'm unaware of? By all accounts the P90 chamber is identical to the P79 and Nissan rated the compression of that motor (flat tops with P79) at 8.3:1. Now, most chamber volume measurements indicate Nissan might have underrated the compression by maybe .1:1, but not much more than that. I've seen plenty of bad info out there and because of that I tend to er on the side of Nissan's claims before what people say on the internet.

You know, people say that all the time, yet there have been SO MANY cars that prove that wrong. Let's just make a short list. Miata BMW Z3 E30 E36 (both those bimmers weighed less than same year Z cars, and had 4 seats! Luxury cars to boot!) FD RX7 That's JUST getting started. Z cars didn't have air bags until the Z32 and the weight gain trend had already started. Yes regulations mandated that engineers put more into cars and they did gain some weight. And some engineers were smart enough to work around the constraints to keep things under control, not just blindly add things to meet compliance. Again, this is something that a few modern cars are really changing some ideas about. The miata has actually gotten lighter when you consider it's added physical dimensions combined with being more equipped than ever. The bare chassis is substantially lighter than ever. The new BRZ is extremely light for what it is and has 4 seats. Now Hyundai is also talking about making a sub 2900 pound coupe. Ford is talking about pulling 750 pounds off each vehicle in the next 10 years. It seems there's a trend that's finally in our favor and showing what ENGINEERS can do, not what a government can mandate for safety.

Pretty sure the Brock Coupe isn't an original guys... But some of the photos are sad non-the-less.

Tony is dead on, and that's pretty much the way I see the history of the Z car and the 90's high end JDM imports. And I'd GLADLY welcome a well done 4 cylinder, as long as we're talking about getting the chassis down under 2800lbs. It's extremely sad to me that the "smaller, lighter, silvia" was HEAVIER than the S30. Just no excuse imo. Again, I'm so glad the BRZ is making such a splash and I hope they sell like hotcakes. I want the automotive world to see there's a REAL market for lightweight cars, even if it comes at a cost of lost noise standards, lost features to put on a marketing brochure, or lost junk in the warehouse to get rid of. Less IS more, and I hope nissan is seeing that. But all that said, I think the hardest thing to keep in perspective, was that the S30 was NEVER a "poorly equipped" car for it's market. Just one drive in other cars from Nissan's lineup from the era, or a drive in a early 70's 911 will tell you that. Nissan has ALWAYS had a "have it all" mindset. The 510 was every bit as good as a BMW 3 series and us Americans got to see Brock really "stick it to 'em" and we Americans fell in love with the 510, which all the mags agreed the 510 was the car to have between the two. It's really not a surprise to me that Nissan did what they did with the S130. They moved on, thinking they could have MORE and still retain their customers. What they failed to see is that by '79 cars were already getting faster again, not slower. While the S130 was still one of the fastest cars in Japan, it was getting left behind by the competition. By the time Nissan was making a true "world performer" again they'd priced themselves out of the market. In fact, even the GTR is again, a product of this "have it all" mindset Nissan, and even the Japanese manufactures in general, seem to have. With the GTR Nissan told the world "you can be every bit as fast as a Porsche, or even Ferrari, and be comfortable. It can be easy to drive and come with all the latest gadgets. And it can be cheaper too. As much as I'm not a huge Mustang fan, at least it's never really left it's customer base. Sure they've gotten porky over the years, but not to the same ratio as the Z cars, and certainly not when you look at it's market averages. And most importantly, it's never lost it's essence. I've drive the '65, '68, '71, '85, '88, '90, '93, '95, '00, '03, '07 mustangs, and all of them gave me the same feeling. It's like the car said, "Lets go have fun. Let's go see the ocean and then find some open road to stretch our legs on. Let's find some red lights and see if there's trouble waiting for us." You never questioned what the car was all about. It's not just about a V8. It's about the right V8 in the right chassis that makes you want to enjoy life. It's why they've sold so well over the years. They're the pony car for the "average joe" which unfortunately hasn't always been a drenched market for new cars. I'm betting few will be reading this all, but I'm probably rambling so much because some of the things like this are actually really exciting me and giving me hope for the future auto market. So here's me raising my glass to a smaller, lighter, Z car.

Really now? Because by all accounts with a OEM gasket you'd be at 8.3:1 compression, just a .9 jump from 7.4, not the 1.6 jump you're saying your motor is. Are you running an ultra thin HG? This is certainly true. I'm sorry if I seemed rude at all previously. It's just that timing info for various setups is surprisingly hard to come by for hard facts. I know the flat top P90 combo will REQUIRE less timing, which is different than WITHSTANDING less timing. What troubles me isn't that you could only run 14 degrees at 10 psi, it's that you had detonation with 94 octane which I don't believe should really have been the case. What I'd LOVE, is for you to get some 110 in there and play with the map to see where peak power really shows up when detonation isn't on the table. The danger I see with this setup is that people don't realize how much less timing they'll NEED with the extra quench the flat tops provide and just assume they'll back a few degrees off using the stock dizzy. I've always maintained that to do this setup right you need programmable fuel and spark, and it makes me quite happy that's what you're doing and sharing info with us.

Yea this is weird results if you ask me. I'd be looking very closely for something else going on. First thing first I'd do a long full throttle run and shut the engine off and check the plugs. Considering how many people have run 10psi+ on 91 and less octane with NO intercooler on the STOCK ecu with no extra timing being pulled... I'd say there's something else going on here. But that's just my hunch. Thank you for the data though. It's always helpful.

http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/62749-new-photo-of-the-z-car-doing-a-wheelie/page__hl__%2Bjnjdragracing+%2Br200 Plenty of guys running big torque with r200's out there. Read that thread and you'll see they were using cv's with stock stub axles. And considering the shock loads from those super tall slicks I think anyone with ANY horsepower or torque would have a hard time breaking an r200 or cv's mated to them in a street tire setup, unless they decided to go from 3rd to 5th slamming gears with 800+ ft/lbs on tap, and you'd need to be going 100mph+ to get traction with that kind power in most cases.

I'll reply so tony can correct me later. (you know I love to tease) You can gap rings and piston clearance as loose as needed for a given piston temp and be fine. As long as when under power at temp your pistons are in the right tolerance window then there's not an issue with piston temp, per say. The issue comes when you start looking at the fact that oil likes to get gummy at elevated temps and the oil surface on the bottom of the piston starts getting caked, and now you have an oiling issue. Keeping the pistons cooler will help prevent this heat driven sludge. Then there's the other benefit in that if you can keep the piston a bit cooler then you don't have to clearance for quite as much gap, meaning slightly better cold running condition. It might not sound like a bit deal, but I've raced 9 (daily driven) second Hondas and at that level every .001 of less gap needed is very welcomed.

I was real impressed with the 375-385HP they were getting with these motors NA when they first came out and told a lot of people they'd be killer donor engines because Hyundai's like other Korean cars plummet in value at about 10 years of age. The biggest issue though is always transmissions, which is why I think we don't see more VH and 1UZ swaps. They're very affordable motors, but you'll spend at least $500 just adapting it to a transmission you like, and when the motor on costs $500 to begin with... Then Ford came out with the new 5.0 Coyote capable of WELL over 400hp, (2011 GT's are putting 390+ to the wheels stock) rated at 444hp for the boss with just minor tweaks really. The upshot with the Ford engine is that if you wanted to do the swap NOW, they have a standalone wiring harness specifically made for hot rod swaps, and is still fully usable for a BAR swap if you were going that route. At over $7k that might seem steep for an engine, but remember that it's BRAND NEW, and you don't have to spend hours figuring out the wiring, and it bolts up to a T56 perfectly. Same can't be said for the Hyundai Genesis as of right now. Finding wreaked ones is difficult and the ones in good shape will be hard to find killer deals on for a while. The future really does look bright for the engine swapping hybrid'ers like us.

I was going to mention all this info as well but you beat me to it. The donor vehicle also has to be from the same weight class, so it can't be a F250 for example. I don't remember the exact weight class numbers but I remember it making it very tough to legally put a BBF in a S30. As to the tank info, you're exactly correct, though I'd like to add a bit of info. The law doesn't specifically say you need to use the donor vehicle tank, it's just that there's sensors and such that are required therefor transferring the tank with such sensors makes sense. THOUGH, you can adapt those sensors to a different tank as long as you do everything needed to make sure the tank meets those emissions requirements. It's a bit of legwork to get all the documentation, but it'll make the ref happy and make for less fabrication work for yourself. That's definitely something that makes the LS1 conversion even more inviting, is that people use LS1 gas tanks anyways since they fit so nicely. And back on topic: Updates please! This is a very sweet swap and I'm looking forward to seeing more about it.

Which is exactly what I was eluding to. This isn't a "new" technology just like hOnDA VTEC isn't anything new really either. Honda simply popularized it, and it's ironic that they're the same exact company who made these oil jets all the rage as well. Again, never once have I discounted the idea. I'd just like to see more hard data out there instead of speculation. "So and so does it so it must be a good idea" rarely flies for me, and was very much the tone of MUCH of this thread. TimZ has the right attitude about it and I'm glad to see someone who might actually need them doing it. I never once in any of these posts set out to say he was making a mistake, just that there's lots of assuming going on which we all know can be quite dangerous.

Yes we might see these cooling jets in a lot of those racingw series today, but from all I've seen they've kinda followed the OEM market in many ways. Though not the case for formula 1, wrc, gt1, jgtc, etc have very close ties with production engines as a base. Now, who leads who is tough for me to tell from the outside, but considering how many engines with almost zero racing interest suddenly started popping up with oil jet piston coolers really has me wondering how much race teams really cared about them. And honestly I'm not that knowledgable about f1 history, but didn't the oil jets not get put into use until the high output turbo years? Which is relatively recent for the age of the technology. And I don't think it's just NASCAR that doesn't use them to this day. I don't think they're used at all in NHRA top fuelers, and I can't find concrete use in many areas like Dakar/Baja which makes me think it's not a huge concern. And you're right, you ARE running tight tolerances. You're also producing plenty of heat. Of the L motors on this site yours is definitely one of the better candidates to maybe benefit from this mod.

Maybe I'm just sticking out like a sore thumb here, but has anyone done some basic research comparing bearing tolerances on factory engines with and without piston oil jets? Seems to me that since so many high level race groups ignore them altogether that they look more like a solution forthe trend in modern engines to run tighter and tighter tolerance with thinner and thinner oils. I'll never say what Tim did is pointless and I commend him for doing it, I just feel like there's an elephant in the room that nobody wants to spend the time looking into. If I was 15 again, living with my parents with nothing but time on my hands I'd just go whip up a spreadsheet. Alas that's not the case for me anymore. Maybe I'll find a way to make the time if nobody else jumps on it. In the end, as long as the pump has the capacity to support it I'm all for it. I've just been curious why we've seen these jets on non-performance minded engines for so long with very little hardcore data put out there for everyone to see. Due to the lack of precedence in the racing world I've just felt/assumed they were just kind of a bragging right of Honda boys reading the spec sheets of their engines...

All good info As to getting that few inches of lift there's a plethora of ways to do it. Picker like you mention, lifting by the damper is good too. One that I like is to lift with a jack at the bell housing. Easy to make stable with wood blocks and I'm personally less worried about hurting the bell housing and rear mating surfaces than I am the front of the crank.

Yea I guess that is an option isn't it? It's just that with ms ll you don't need a GM control module at all if you have the turbo CAS dizzy. Your idea would certainly be easier if not cheaper as well since those modules are everywhere. As for the oil return, the OP should just deal with the reality of pulling the pan. Should only take about an hour IMO and the engine doesn't need to be pulled to do so, just pull the mounts and get a good 2" of clearance for a wrench to get in there, voila.

Check the fuel injector sticky for more info on injector and rail options. For people without any cooling solution I recommend not going over 10psi. 12 can be done, but I've never wanted to chance it for prolonged periods. Also notice I made it a boost level limitation, not a power limitation. The issue with needing an intercooler is HEAT, which is directly related to two main factors. 1. PSI Heat. When you compress air it gets hotter, plain and simple. 2. Efficiency range of Compressor. Raising PSI might throw you out of the sweet spot of the compressor inducing much unwanted heat, but increasing the flow with other mods can sometimes bring you back down towards the sweet spot depending on the compressor and the engine setup. There's no perfect answer, but most people end up finding out what I recommended at the start in this post. Don't venture too far beyond 10psi. With programmable fuel/spark pulling more timing and adding enough fuel might get you safely to 12psi just fine, it's more for the stock EFI that I'm speaking of. The path to 300hp is a very wide and easy path. Hundreds, if not thousands of people have done it with the L motor and ways of achieving it are nearly endless. As far as getting MS to control spark, I personally would just hunt around for the 82-83 dizzy. MS can control it directly and if you ever end up running super high RPM you can always do a crank trigger down the road. Even if it ends up costing you $100 it'd be worth every penny imo because you'll spend AT LEAST that if not double going COP or even Wasted Spark.

And I could generally agree with that. The article has nothing to do against a make or model but a styling preference. And I agree to an extent. If you want your car to be 3" or more lowered expect it to be a show car or expect to have issues. Don't be a whinny little tool when things don't work out right because you wanted form over function. And I feel the same way about the hellaflush and/or stance movement. Form over function is fine when it's a limited use vehicle so don't complain when you try to DD a show setup.

I often have a beer bottle for my scale too!

Yes, more pics please! Not many people willing to do fender exits, my hat is off, brave man you.

No offense here, just providing a counter point to your post Sometimes for every one person with a failed setup there's 20 more without issue That doesn't invalidate the one, its just nice for people to have a complete picture.

I never meant for you to take offense to what I said. What you said was definitely accurate and I have no quarrels with it. I just simply feel that instead of telling the OP to scale up the project design to meet the goals that it makes more sense to scale down the project design to meet more realistic goals. Usually people tend to get ahead of themselves with projects and tend to go overboard. From what the OP was saying he wanted "to have fun doing some off roading" (paraphrased) he doesn't need 38" wheels and I was just trying to push him into the direction of a brock-like design goal. Instead of going for rock-crawler status and running HUGE wheels, why not run a simpler setup that will still "work"? That's my point. It has NOTHING to do with getting into a pissing match on who's done more or knows more about X. I'm sure you're not an idiot, again, I never intended you to feel I was saying that. I just don't like people getting advice that either shuts down their idea, or gets them going MUCH further down the project road than needed to get to something they'll be happy with. Much like tell people to find out what 200-300hp in a S30 feels like before assuming they want 500+hp because that's what they're used to coming from other chassis that are considerably heavier. John C ~ I'm trying to be as civil as I can be here and hopefully it shows. I'm in the middle of a 9 day project working 12 hour days + 3 hours of commuting a day. If this post needs to be deleted for any reason feel free and I'm sorry if I don't respond in the next 4 days.

Oh come on Tony! You should have clearly seen that I was more poking at the prevalent response that a "lifted Z won't work". I made no reference to a tire size "working" or having been done by Brock. I was merely trying to say that a lifted, rally setup has been done and done effectively.